This is my description of how the professionals play American Football (in case you want to watch the Superbowl tonight). I am no expert but reading through another thread made me realize how confusing the sport is when a bunch of people are all trying to explain it to you at the same time. I make no promises that I'll do a better job, but that's my goal.
First a few basic pieces of information about the field and scoring:
1) There are two teams playing. At any given time, one has possession of the ball and the other is on defense. As the game progresses the teams switch between offense and defense. If team A is targetting the end zone at the East end of the field, then team B is targetting the end zone at the West end of the field, and vice versa. The direction each team targets changes after each quarter/half, but it doesn't matter much except for wind. There are 4 quarters and 2 halves... although the end of the 1st and 3rd quarter don't matter that much. After the half, the offensive of whoever has the ball stops, so the team will desperately try to score before the clock runs out.
2) The field is 100 yards long. At each end of the field is an 'end zone' which is 10 yards long. See the diagram:
3) There are several ways to score. The best way is for someone carrying the ball to run past the goal line into the end zone (touchdown, worth 6 points). Also, a receiver can catch the ball while standing in the end zone. Another way is for a kicker to kick the ball through the field goal (worth 3 points), seen here:
4) If you score a touchdown, you then get a chance to make a field goal in addition, but it's only worth 1 point this time. Usually, when a team gets a touchdown, they then get a field goal also, which is worth a total of 7 points.
5) If you get tackled in your own end zone (as opposed to the other end zone which you are trying to run towards) it is a 'safety' and your opponent gets 2 points.
How the game is played
After a coin toss, one team is selected to kick off and the other team receives. The kicker kicks the ball as far as he can, and then his teammates run towards the receiving team to tackle them as soon as possible. The receiving team catches the ball and runs towards the kicking team's end zone. Either the runner with the ball gets tackled, or the play is settled before the kicking team even gets there.... the details are beyond the scope of this guide but I can answer questions about it. Here is an example where the kicking team actually failed to tackle the receiving team:
Suppose instead that the guy carrying the ball was tackled. That spot is where the receiving team begins their offensive. They have four chances (downs) to advance 10 yards towards the opponent's end zone. If they manage to advance 10+ yards, then their are once again given four chances to advance another 10 yards (first down). This continues until they fail to advance 10 yards or make it close to the opponent's end zone.
After the third down, if the offensive team has not advanced 10 yards yet, then it's their last chance to do so. Usually, the team will punt instead of trying to get the first down. There is a good reason for this. If you are on offense and you punt, then the other team picks up their offense from wherever the guy who catches the ball is tackled. However, if you instead choose to try to get the first down, and you fail, then the other team picks up their offense from the same spot where you started the last play (much closer to your own end zone; bad for you).
How do teams on offense advance? They have a few choices. The play begins when the ball is tossed to the quarterback. The quarterback then either throws the ball to a receiver, hands it off to a runner (running back), or occasionally runs with it himself. Once the ball has crossed the 'line of scrimmage' (the spot where the ball was before the play began), it can no longer be thrown forwards. Occasionally people throw the ball backwards (lateral) but that's not common. So for most plays the ball is either thrown forwards to a receiver or handed to a runner.
Lastly, how does the defensive team get the ball so they can go on the offensive? There are a few ways. The first is if they succeed in defending against the first down, forcing the other team to punt. The second is to 'intercept' the ball. If the quarterback throws a poor pass, then a defender might catch it instead of the receiver... thus turning the ball over to the defensive team. Also, if a running back or the quarterback (or wide receiver) drops the ball while he was in clear possession of it, it is a 'fumble' meaning whoever picks the ball up off the ground gets to go on the offensive.
Conclusion
This is by no means comprehensive. I did not explain what the deal is with flags/penalties, what a touchback is, or many other things. I tried to just focus on the things that you need to know in order to understand what the heck is going on.
Hahaha so many people are clueless..guess it really is mainly an American sport..
And to make note of that, not everyone in America even watches it either. Though it still grabs SO MUCH attention in US that it's crazy, similar to how "Professional Starcraft" can only be a Korean sport.... (despite the fact that it was made by Blizzard which is American...)
On February 08 2010 05:58 Neivler wrote: If a player receives the ball when he is in the endzone, is it still a touchdown then?
Assuming it's the correct endzone, yes. More or less, if the ball crosses the endzone line while still legally in possession of the offensive team, then it is a touchdown. Likewise, if the defensive team catches the ball (an interception) and manages to run into the opposite endzone, they will get a touchdown.
Also might want to note that a safety is especially bad because not only does the other team get points, they get the ball afterward as opposed to a normal score which gives the ball to the defense.
Hahaha so many people are clueless..guess it really is mainly an American sport..
And to make note of that, not everyone in America even watches it either. Though it still grabs SO MUCH attention in US that it's crazy, similar to how "Professional Starcraft" can only be a Korean sport.... (despite the fact that it was made by Blizzard which is American...)
starcraft is not a sport.... it is competitive but in no shape or form is it excercise. seriously, if i were a progamer id be ashamed to call myself a "cyber-athlete"... i would be so embarassed if i had to refer to myself as that
On February 08 2010 06:01 Sauron wrote: This blog's title is misleading
Notice the picture when you first open the blog :3
On February 08 2010 06:04 LordWeird wrote: Also might want to note that a safety is especially bad because not only does the other team get points, they get the ball afterward as opposed to a normal score which gives the ball to the defense.
Yeah I almost mentioned this then decided to leave it out. Good point.
Hahaha so many people are clueless..guess it really is mainly an American sport..
And to make note of that, not everyone in America even watches it either. Though it still grabs SO MUCH attention in US that it's crazy, similar to how "Professional Starcraft" can only be a Korean sport.... (despite the fact that it was made by Blizzard which is American...)
starcraft is not a sport.... it is competitive but in no shape or form is it excercise. seriously, if i were a progamer id be ashamed to call myself a "cyber-athlete"... i would be so embarassed if i had to refer to myself as that
You seem to be representing your opinion of what a sport is as fact...
On February 08 2010 06:35 neobowman wrote: You could just read Eyeshield 21 to figure out the rules. A much more fun way, though it's a bit time consuming.
Eyeshield is so misleading until later on in the series hahaha
Hahaha so many people are clueless..guess it really is mainly an American sport..
And to make note of that, not everyone in America even watches it either. Though it still grabs SO MUCH attention in US that it's crazy, similar to how "Professional Starcraft" can only be a Korean sport.... (despite the fact that it was made by Blizzard which is American...)
starcraft is not a sport.... it is competitive but in no shape or form is it excercise. seriously, if i were a progamer id be ashamed to call myself a "cyber-athlete"... i would be so embarassed if i had to refer to myself as that
Everyone has their own standards for what defines a "sport."
Shooting is in the olympics, and I burn more calories making myself a bowl of cereal in the morning than the "athletes" in that sport do.
Am I going to diss the players and say they should be embarrassed to call them selves Olympic athletes?
No. Because I can actually respect the fact that they are extremely talented individuals and it's fun to watch them preform in competition.
yeah, when he is behind the line of scrimmage. everyone can throw sideways/backwards regardless of where they are, which is called a lateral (also called a backwards pass)
Anyone can take the ball at the beginning of the play. Quarterback is just the name of the position of the person who generally gets/throws the ball. The center can hike directly to the running back if he wanted to, but generally you hike to the quarterback who either hands it off for a run or throws it forwards. There have been famous plays where a quarterback hands off the ball to the running back, who would then throw it forward (confusing the defense).
Even though this pic is trying to be funny, it's stupid. In football you often do kick the ball, but besides that the game is entirely about running yards and pushing forward on a field (with your feet ofc). You have to stay on your feet or the play is stopped. hence, football.
Another stupid thing about that picture is that baseball is based on the fact that you try and score bases to win, Basketball you try and score baskets to win, so if NFL were to follow in the steps of these other 'american' sports then it would be more likely called goalball/touchdown ball or something else that doesn't sound right. Goalball would make more sense for soccer than NFL would.
Even though this pic is trying to be funny, it's stupid. In football you often do kick the ball, but besides that the game is entirely about running yards and pushing forward on a field (with your feet ofc). You have to stay on your feet or the play is stopped. hence, football.
Another stupid thing about that picture is that baseball is based on the fact that you try and score bases to win, Basketball you try and score baskets to win, so if NFL were to follow in the steps of these other 'american' sports then it would be more likely called goalball/touchdown ball or something else that doesn't sound right. Goalball would make more sense for soccer than NFL would.
still should've made up another name for it instead of taking the name of a totally different sport that already exists.
Even though this pic is trying to be funny, it's stupid. In football you often do kick the ball, but besides that the game is entirely about running yards and pushing forward on a field (with your feet ofc). You have to stay on your feet or the play is stopped. hence, football.
Another stupid thing about that picture is that baseball is based on the fact that you try and score bases to win, Basketball you try and score baskets to win, so if NFL were to follow in the steps of these other 'american' sports then it would be more likely called goalball/touchdown ball or something else that doesn't sound right. Goalball would make more sense for soccer than NFL would.
still should've made up another name for it instead of taking the name of a totally different sport that already exists.
Well the game is made in the US and in the US it's not football its soccer. So while ideally it should be named something else it's not too bad
Even though this pic is trying to be funny, it's stupid. In football you often do kick the ball, but besides that the game is entirely about running yards and pushing forward on a field (with your feet ofc). You have to stay on your feet or the play is stopped. hence, football.
Another stupid thing about that picture is that baseball is based on the fact that you try and score bases to win, Basketball you try and score baskets to win, so if NFL were to follow in the steps of these other 'american' sports then it would be more likely called goalball/touchdown ball or something else that doesn't sound right. Goalball would make more sense for soccer than NFL would.
still should've made up another name for it instead of taking the name of a totally different sport that already exists.
No you got it wrong, see the 2 sports were created/invented around the same time (late 1800s) and both of the sports were not in their current form at the time of creation (or name). So YOu can't say NFL stole the name of Soccer.
OT, OG, C / Offensive Tackle, Guard, Centre: These form the "offensive line" who's job it is to keep anyone from getting to the quarterback. In addition, the Centre starts with the ball, and passes it to the quarterback at the start of a play.
TE / Tight End: Usually a receiver who performs short (under 10 yard) pass plays.
WR / Wide Receiver: They run forward along different routes to be passed to by the QB.
QB / Quarterback: The 'general', he handles the ball, passing it to receivers or handing it to running backs, also relates plays to his offense. Generally the biggest stars on a team (Peyton Manning, Tom Brady)
FB / Full back: A running back who mainly does short (1-2 yard) running plays, is generally bigger then the running back, and otherwise blocks for the quarter back.
TB / Tail back (Running back): When opting for a running play, he is the one to do it. May also fake runs, or block.
Defense:
DE, DL / Defensive End, Defensive Lineman: They form the 'defensive line' who's job it is to tackle the quarterback, or the running back if he has the ball.
CB / Corner back: It is his job to watch the Wide Receivers, and make sure they are covered and can't catch the ball if it is thrown to them.
LB / Line backer: They have multiple jobs, from watching for running plays, covering Tight Ends or Receivers, or 'blitzing', in which they run after the quarterback along with the defensive line, while sacrificing a rear defense.
FS / Free Safety: As the name implies, he is a 'free' man that usually acts as a last line of defense in case the offense gets through everyone else. He can also aid the CBs in watching deep receivers.
SS / Strong Safety: Usually used as a combination LB/CB, he can both watch receivers with the conerbacks, cover for a linebacker who blitzed, watch a tight end or even blitz himself.
That's almost every sport you're describing there might as well call it legball or something. I don't understand the attraction of watching American Football it seems to be almost entirely physical and little skill except the quarterback, seems you either need speed or mass. Also the fact that they are constantly bending over in tight silk pants puts me off.
Even though this pic is trying to be funny, it's stupid. In football you often do kick the ball, but besides that the game is entirely about running yards and pushing forward on a field (with your feet ofc). You have to stay on your feet or the play is stopped. hence, football.
Another stupid thing about that picture is that baseball is based on the fact that you try and score bases to win, Basketball you try and score baskets to win, so if NFL were to follow in the steps of these other 'american' sports then it would be more likely called goalball/touchdown ball or something else that doesn't sound right. Goalball would make more sense for soccer than NFL would.
Since I wanted to post this obligatory non-US pic and I can't I am now bound to elaborate on your statement.
In handegg you often do kick the egg
It's not a ball...
baseball basketball
They're still using a ball...
Now, what would be the etymology of soccer? So that you wear socks? You do that in most sport disciplines...
Now, when you look for the etymology of football, the first reference you find is medieval Europe. Older = calls the dibs on the name first = we win!
Not to mention that American football (as it should be called) is closer related to another game called Rugby (basically, it's all the same but with armour which makes it less manly).
Edit:
Not to mention the difference in the rules (Rugby is a hard game for hard men)
Rugby final vs superbowl to watch on tv right now... So hard to choose...
lol soccer is the gayest sport, pretty sure if NFL players took off their pads people would be ruined for life or dead very often. These guys almost always retire with chronic injuries and their life expectancies are far lower than average people even thought they are physically in better shape/healthier (aside from injuries) than people.
and yes it is a ball, just because it's an oval shaped ball and not a sphere doesn't mean it's not a ball.
Still, why not call it American Rugby instead of Football? It was originally derived from Rugby and it has a lot more to do with that sport then Football/Soccer.
On February 08 2010 08:51 CharlieMurphy wrote: lol soccer is the gayest sport, pretty sure if NFL players took off their pads people would be ruined for life or dead very often. These guys almost always retire with chronic injuries and their life expectancies are far lower than average people even thought they are physically in better shape/healthier (aside from injuries) than people.
and yes it is a ball, just because it's an oval shaped ball and not a sphere doesn't mean it's not a ball.
average life expectancies of ice hockey players : 73.9 average life expectancies of chess players: 62,9
On February 08 2010 08:51 CharlieMurphy wrote: lol soccer is the gayest sport, pretty sure if NFL players took off their pads people would be ruined for life or dead very often. These guys almost always retire with chronic injuries and their life expectancies are far lower than average people even thought they are physically in better shape/healthier (aside from injuries) than people.
and yes it is a ball, just because it's an oval shaped ball and not a sphere doesn't mean it's not a ball.
average life expectancies of ice hockey players : 73.9 average life expectancies of chess players: 62,9
speaking of gay sports...
isn't american football without all the equipment the thing we call rugby over here?
American football is the pussy sport where every player has to over guard themselves with big cups of plastic protecting every limb and bone where as rugby it's you and the ball NO plastic NO helmets NO nothing... I'm afraid you sir above me are mistaken badly
Studies in the United States show that men who play five or more years in the NFL have a life expectancy of 55, 20 years less than the average in the general public. For linemen, perhaps due to their size, the life expectancy is 52.
Rugby players in comparison live 10 years less than normal people (so about 65)
PS- Rugby and NFL are so different. Rugby is more like contact soccer with your hands.
Studies in the United States show that men who play five or more years in the NFL have a life expectancy of 55, 20 years less than the average in the general public. For linemen, perhaps due to their size, the life expectancy is 52.
That is fucking terrifying. You got a link to the studies?
God Americans are so pushy when it comes to their sports. A sport being 'tough' doesn't make it good. If you ever talk to an american about soccer being a better sport, they say, soccer is for pussies, we tackle.
On February 08 2010 11:55 HazMat wrote: God Americans are so pushy when it comes to their sports. A sport being 'tough' doesn't make it good. If you ever talk to an american about soccer being a better sport, they say, soccer is for pussies, we tackle.
Americans? Which people spoke for all Americans? My observation is that only some Americans are like this.... aren't some soccer fans equally miserable?
On February 08 2010 11:55 HazMat wrote: God Americans are so pushy when it comes to their sports. A sport being 'tough' doesn't make it good. If you ever talk to an american about soccer being a better sport, they say, soccer is for pussies, we tackle.
it was 'you guys' who started it. so don't blame me or my people.
On February 08 2010 11:55 HazMat wrote: God Americans are so pushy when it comes to their sports. A sport being 'tough' doesn't make it good. If you ever talk to an american about soccer being a better sport, they say, soccer is for pussies, we tackle.
it was 'you guys' who started it. so don't blame me or my people.
I think the problem is that American football is actually, or at least in my opinion, quite complicated. There are a few different ways to score, and the score you get varies from method to method.
For the sake of comparison, think about soccer and hockey. They are relatively simple and you get one point for getting your ball/bucket into the other team's nest.
On February 08 2010 12:48 illu wrote: I think the problem is that American football is actually, or at least in my opinion, quite complicated. There are a few different ways to score, and the score you get varies from method to method.
For the sake of comparison, think about soccer and hockey. They are relatively simple and you get one point for getting your ball/bucket into the other team's nest.
For the sake of comparison, think about Starcraft. It is relatively simple and you get one win for getting the opponent to write gg before you.
Futbol (soccer) is a beautiful sport, there's no reason to be insulting it. It's not tough like rugby or football or hockey, but it's not trying to be.
As for comparing football and rugby, the argument that rugby or Aussie rules are football without pads is bogus. Aside from the fact that most NFL players are better/stronger/bigger athletes (and they are much bigger, and NOT fatter), the games work differently. Most tackles in rugby are true tackles, at low speeds because there's not much distant to accelerate. Tackles in football are violent collisions, where people can essentially dive at each other, and the helmets actually make the problem worse. Football helmets are very dangerous and very hard.
Watching it on a TV, it's difficult to comprehend just how big NFL players are. Dhani Jones went to workout with Blackheath in London, and he's a lower level player in the NFL now. He's smaller than anyone on a line and he's not fast anymore. But he was the biggest and fastest player on the pitch.
It used to be played without pads around the turn of the century, and at that point is was a much slower game. In 1909, 33 people died playing college football (not that many teams were playing at that point) and 76 were seriously injured. President Theodore Roosevelt is actually the one who forced the game to make reforms with rules and padding, or else he would try to ban the game. Theodore Roosevelt was definitely a tough guy.
On February 08 2010 12:48 illu wrote: I think the problem is that American football is actually, or at least in my opinion, quite complicated. There are a few different ways to score, and the score you get varies from method to method.
For the sake of comparison, think about soccer and hockey. They are relatively simple and you get one point for getting your ball/bucket into the other team's nest.
For the sake of comparison, think about Starcraft. It is relatively simple and you get one win for getting the opponent to write gg before you.
Can we keep the "my sport is better than your sport" or "my sport is tougher/more physical than your sport" stuff out of this thread? The OP isn't pushing any of this bullshit and there's no reason to respond with anything along these lines.
Just broaden your horizons a little and try to understand why other people enjoy a sport. Soccer is an amazing sport once you learn to appreciate it and personally it took me a while to do so. Unfortunately many Americans don't want to take the time to understand the game so they don't appreciate it the same way the rest of the world does.
Does anyone want to explain rugby to me? It looks interesting and shares a lot of characteristics with football, which I also enjoy, but I understand nothing about the rules of the game.
It also doesn't help that videos like that come out and the violence is heavily promoted by ESPN. Not only are those big layout tackles dangerous, but they're also less accurate and lead to more missed tackles, instead of the sure tackle by driving through someone.
Time Magazine just did an article about brain damage from football. The gist was basically that playing football, even at the middle school/high school level leads to serious brain damage. It's extremely barbaric, yet we love to watch it. o.o
I ended up in fact watching the Super Bowl tonight. I didn't think I would, but read your guide nonetheless, because I have gotten somewhat curious in my 20 some years of being an American. I found your guide to be immensely helpful while watching the game.
Btw, anyone know why it's called the super bowl? I guess what I'm asking is why are these big tournament games called bowls? It's not like the Stanley Cup where it's an actual cup, right? They're not winning a bowl... Is it because the stadium is shaped like a bowl?
Yep. Bowl games started in college football because of the bowl shape, and when the NFL was created they decided to call it that. Nothing really special about it.
On February 08 2010 13:56 thopol wrote: Hey, thanks Micronesia.
I ended up in fact watching the Super Bowl tonight. I didn't think I would, but read your guide nonetheless, because I have gotten somewhat curious in my 20 some years of being an American. I found your guide to be immensely helpful while watching the game.
On February 08 2010 13:46 Jibba wrote: It also doesn't help that videos like that come out and the violence is heavily promoted by ESPN. Not only are those big layout tackles dangerous, but they're also less accurate and lead to more missed tackles, instead of the sure tackle by driving through someone.
Time Magazine just did an article about brain damage from football. The gist was basically that playing football, even at the middle school/high school level leads to serious brain damage. It's extremely barbaric, yet we love to watch it. o.o
it's a gladiatorial thing
you know, romans n shiit
I'm also not a big fan of football (hoops is my game) till I came across scott fujita in my multiethnic self-studies, thought I give it a shot, and it was pretty cool. you really gotta identify with it to love it, that's why it's almost a religion in rural places where the footballers are heroes
LA's too big a city and we don't have foot traffic like NY, and no football team here, so when the Lakers win the championship the celebration's pretty muffled and no big block parties or whatever...
On February 08 2010 07:49 CharlieMurphy wrote: Goalball would make more sense for soccer than NFL would.
Let me get this straight. You are saying that a game in which you hit the ball with your foot 90% of the time, and aren't even ALLOWED to touch it with your hands, makes less sense to be called football than a game where only 2 people on either team EVER touch the ball with their foot?
Your random logic for the method of sport appellation in America also holds no weight in England, from which the game football comes. We name games not after the method of scoring (bases, baskets), rather after actions or placenames. Or occasionally completely bizarre and arbitrary names like Ping Pong; which apparently according to Wikipedia was called Wiff-Waff back in the day.
You must be a debater or stoned, because to construct an argument as shaky as the one you did requires either a seriously argumentative brain, or heroine.
Look, you can debate the name all you want, it's called football in the US and there is zero chance of you getting the entire country to stop calling the sport football so it doesn't even matter if the name makes sense. I agree it doesn't, but language exists so you can communicate so you have to call it what everyone else does or you're missing the point of language.
I never realised how much gridiron was based off rugby. It makes a bit more sense now. So American football seems me to be more explosive strength where rugby is more about overall continuous fitness. Still the games are quite different. I'd rather watch rugby anyday. I'm not a big fan of having all these breaks between play.
On February 09 2010 13:21 Ludrik wrote: I never realised how much gridiron was based off rugby. It makes a bit more sense now. So American football seems me to be more explosive strength where rugby is more about overall continuous fitness. Still the games are quite different.
I think that's a fair way to put it. The type of weight lifting they do is largely built around explosive power and many of the speed position players were former sprinters in highschool and college.
For some reason, NFL football doesn't draw me as much as college football does. I think part of it is because the atmosphere is so much better at college games so the breaks aren't as annoying, and the game is a lot more emotional and unpredictable when 20 year olds are playing it.
On February 09 2010 13:21 Ludrik wrote: I never realised how much gridiron was based off rugby. It makes a bit more sense now. So American football seems me to be more explosive strength where rugby is more about overall continuous fitness. Still the games are quite different.
I think that's a fair way to put it. The type of weight lifting they do is largely built around explosive power and many of the speed position players were former sprinters in highschool and college.
For some reason, NFL football doesn't draw me as much as college football does. I think part of it is because the atmosphere is so much better at college games so the breaks aren't as annoying, and the game is a lot more emotional and unpredictable when 20 year olds are playing it.
Agree about college ball.. and also for basketball.
On February 08 2010 12:48 illu wrote: I think the problem is that American football is actually, or at least in my opinion, quite complicated. There are a few different ways to score, and the score you get varies from method to method.
For the sake of comparison, think about soccer and hockey. They are relatively simple and you get one point for getting your ball/bucket into the other team's nest.
For the sake of comparison, think about Starcraft. It is relatively simple and you get one win for getting the opponent to write gg before you.
On September 21 2010 03:11 NotTheMonker wrote: Football season is here again, and here is a well-written explanation for those of you who may not understand American football.
Beating up on the vaunted Lion defense, the benchmark of a good quarterback. Yes!!
Those two games, without any exaggeration, are within the top 10 statistically of his career. Fact of the matter is, Vick is a career 76.8rated guy, whose current 63.8 completion% is almost a full 10% over his career average.
Fortunately, hyperbole is not just limited to Vick or even another media darlin', Favre. MARK FRANCHIZE hype is once again in full fucking swing (by Silver no less, who I used to love... now I'm gradually starting to dislike him):
YES! HE HAS ARRIVED!!! Never mind that for almost all of last season, Sanchez had one great play for every four terrible ones he did, or that he was statistically worse than JaMarcus Russell for most of last season. Or that one of the few games he did do well last year was against the Pats (and their overrated D). One game and NONE OF THAT MATTERS!
EPT
![[image loading]](http://www.ncsucrusade.com/images/football.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://www.gtcocalcomp.com/erc/interwritebackgrounds/football_field.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://www.dowdlesports.com/catalog/athletic/gp1gp2.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://www.saasta.fi/saasta/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/handegg.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://static.newworldencyclopedia.org/thumb/3/3c/American_football_positions.svg/300px-American_football_positions.svg.png)
![[image loading]](http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/42530000/jpg/_42530593_seb416.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://www.gleason.to/leech/handegg.jpg)
